From: will.deacon@arm•com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: ftrace: don't validate branch via PLT in ftrace_make_nop()
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 18:15:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170605171552.GQ21944@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170530135220.20759-2-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 01:52:19PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> When turning branch instructions into NOPs, we attempt to validate the
> action by comparing the old value at the call site with the opcode of
> a direct relative branch instruction pointing at the old target.
>
> However, these call sites are statically initialized to call _mcount(),
> and may be redirected via a PLT entry if the module is loaded far away
> from the kernel text, leading to false negatives and spurious errors.
>
> So skip the validation if CONFIG_ARM64_MODULE_PLTS is configured.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro•org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> index 40ad08ac569a..a8db6857cad6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> @@ -84,12 +84,15 @@ int ftrace_make_nop(struct module *mod, struct dyn_ftrace *rec,
> unsigned long addr)
> {
> unsigned long pc = rec->ip;
> - u32 old, new;
> + u32 old = 0, new;
>
> - old = aarch64_insn_gen_branch_imm(pc, addr, AARCH64_INSN_BRANCH_LINK);
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_MODULE_PLTS))
> + old = aarch64_insn_gen_branch_imm(pc, addr,
> + AARCH64_INSN_BRANCH_LINK);
> new = aarch64_insn_gen_nop();
>
> - return ftrace_modify_code(pc, old, new, true);
> + return ftrace_modify_code(pc, old, new,
> + !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_MODULE_PLTS));
Even in the case of PLTs, the instruction is still a branch instruction,
so could we validate the basic opcode fields rather than disable the check
altogether?
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-05 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-30 13:52 [PATCH v2 0/2] arm64: ftrace: fix interop issues with module PLTs Ard Biesheuvel
2017-05-30 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: ftrace: don't validate branch via PLT in ftrace_make_nop() Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-05 17:15 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-06-05 17:26 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-05-30 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: ftrace: add support for far branches to dynamic ftrace Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-05 17:15 ` Will Deacon
2017-06-07 15:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-06-07 15:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-06-07 16:56 ` Will Deacon
2017-06-07 19:02 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-06-08 9:59 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170605171552.GQ21944@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox